Blog -
Disciplinary Literacy: Reading in Subject Disciplines
Why we need more than generic reading strategies
Share on:
by Bradford Research School
on the
Mark Miller is Director of Bradford Research School
Reading and writing are distinct, with many elements that need to be taught separately, but they have a reciprocal relationship.
Every time we read, we have an opportunity to improve our writing.
Every time we write, we draw upon the content and technical aspects of what we have read.
In this first blog of three, we are building on ideas from Recommendation 5 of the EEF’s Improving Literacy in Secondary schools guidance report: ‘Combine writing instruction with reading in every subject’.
Lots in common
According to the EEF:
In reality, reading and writing are overlapping, complementary skills. As students read or write, they draw on a common body of knowledge, related to the topic being studied, and to their understanding of texts, syntax, and vocabulary.
This will look slightly different at various stages of literacy development. For example, in early literacy, children will learn the relationship between letters and sounds, which influences both reading and writing. In GCSE science, pupils can identify polysemous words, before using them in context.
Using think-alouds and interviews, Martin (1987) identified eight categories of what she calls ‘meaning-making strategies’: monitoring, phrasing content, using content prior knowledge, using text from knowledge, rereading, questioning, inferencing, and making connections to author/audience.”
These common approaches look different in reading and writing. For example, when we reread our own writing, we are checking for errors, making sure it makes sense, improving style. When rereading another text, we are clarifying, questioning, following lines of argument.
Same ideas, different lens
Even though we can see lots in common, the very acts of reading and writing create different meanings, and ensure that we engage with ideas in different ways. ‘Writing about it’ and ‘reading about it’ are different things, and can also be complementary.
Fitzgerald and Shanahan (2000) write:
Reading and writing encourage different enough cognitive operations that they offer alternative perspectives that can give rise to new learning or appreciation. Writing about a text, for example, leads to different types of rethinking than rereading alone provides.
Let’s imagine that we are learning about bias. Reading a text and identifying bias, writing a neutral or biased text, writing about the bias in the first text are all different ways to approach bias. There is a value in combining reading and writing.
The skill for us as teachers is to work out when reading will enhance our writing, and when writing will enhance our reading. In our next two posts, we’ll write about how we can do both. To avoid missing these posts, sign up for our half-termly newsletter here.
The EEF guidance suggests a few options for combining reading and writing:
We’re not sure whether to call this combination of reading and writing ‘wreading’ or ‘riting’. It doesn’t roll of the tongue as much as ‘brunch’ or ‘frappucino’.
Next:
Fitzgerald, Jill & Shanahan, Timothy. (2000). Reading and Writing Relationships and their Development.
Martin, Sarah H. (1987). A Description of the Meaning-Making Strategies Reported by Proficient Readers and Writers.
Blog -
Why we need more than generic reading strategies
Blog -
The role of working memory in writing
Blog -
Just because your PD has a balanced design, doesn’t mean it is stable
Blog -
The EEF’s new implementation guidance report places a focus on engaging people
Blog -
We share questions and resources to unpick the EEF’s Voices from the Classroom
This website collects a number of cookies from its users for improving your overall experience of the site.Read more